Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states what the tool returns (common_difference, nth_term, sum_of_n) but does not disclose whether the operation is idempotent, read-only, or has side effects. For a calculator, this is a notable gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences: the first states purpose and return, the second references related tools. It is front-loaded, devoid of fluff, and earns its space.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple calculator with complete schema and an output schema (implied by return field listing), the description covers the core functionality and return value. It briefly mentions related tools via list_bundles, providing some context. Minor gaps: no error handling or edge cases.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's property descriptions. The return field names are mentioned, but parameter syntax or format is not elaborated.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly specifies the tool's function: 'Calculate nth term and sum of arithmetic or geometric sequence.' It uses a specific verb and resource, making the purpose unambiguous. Though sibling tools exist, the description distinguishes by stating explicit sequence types.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description only mentions 'See list_bundles for related 'math' calculators,' which hints at alternatives but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus others. No when-not or prerequisite information is given.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.